Skip to main content

About your Search

20110701
20110731
Search Results 0 to 2 of about 3
. there was money to be had and project. there was the big exciting new they embraced it heartily. as gil said we also had an emerging commercial space market. it is something that has been on the horizon with the carter administration. it was embraced in the reagan administration. by the time we arrived there was $5 billion a year of commercial beginning to get complicated. space business and it was rules of the road, with the proper role of the government is and how to interact with other countries, what we expected and what is the role of government services? utilization of commercial contributor. so that was clearly a large so all those things were the word gets complicated vision of where we get space policy and space needs. as we said before we had a national space council. the president was interested in the area of it and so he was more than happy to have one. we had rate relations and is each one of these guys will tell you, the chemistry inside the white house makes a big and how it is done. difference on what can be done there is internal wrangling for a variety of reasons, things get
and illinois because those are kind of the big jackpot states that are really driving each party's potential for gain. and then i have a question mark as far as which party's going to gape or lose a site, it could be a fair fight in states like iowa, new jersey and arizona. but i'm sure the five states we'll be talking a lot about this morning and i'll stop short from going in-depth on them are illinois, north carolina, which are both parties' opportunities for partisan capitalization on this redistricting, illinois for democrats, picking up, you know, potentially five or six seats, or four or five seats, republicans losing five or six in illinois, north carolina where i put republican gains at possibly three seats depending on the legal challenge to the map that republicans are proposing, and then california, where i think democrats, at the end of the day, will probably pick up two or three seats as a result of the untangling of california's uncompetitive lines at the moment. texas, where, you know, i expect it to either be a draw or republicans netting two seats depending on the legal chal
. what is pro-big business is actually sometimes more fundamentally seen as pro-first amendment. >> i could just add a footnote to that. it is interesting that justice brier, i think it, brought this out to discuss the commercial speech issue. there are some cases in which businesses are winning and some of them as a strike me as corp. first amendment issues. citizens united is a core but first amendment speech for corporations issue. they do not seem to have much to do with the corporate governance for self expression when is someone trying to put together a lot of information about who is taking which prescription and which doctors are prescribing which so they can market their drugs more effectively. is it first amendment case, but it does not feel like one to me, or apparently justice breyer. >> the same justices that dissented, including the female justices, joined at scully of -- scalia's broad view on violent video games. they are not necessarily about how we organize ourselves either. >> they are the multi-billion dollar gaming industry. that is not the way that most people re
Search Results 0 to 2 of about 3